ML20210K477
| ML20210K477 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/09/1986 |
| From: | Paulson W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8604280319 | |
| Download: ML20210K477 (44) | |
Text
4
.p LICENSEE: B&W OWNERS GROUP
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF APRIL 8, 1986 MEETING WITH THE B&W OWNERS GROUP On April 8, 1986', members of the NRC staff met with representatives of the B&W Owners Group (B&WOG). The purpose of the meeting was to present information to the NRC regarding the B&WOG trip reduction and transient response improvement program including the status of the program plan and actions in' progress. A list of attendees is enclosed (Enclosure 1). A copy of the viewgraphs used during the owners group presentation is also enclosed (Enclosure 2).
By letter dated January 24, 1986, addressed to the Chariman, B&W Owners Group, the NRC Executive Director for Operations stated that there is need to reexamine the basic design for B&W reactors.
In a meeting on February 5, 1986, the Owners Group indicated that they would take the lead in resolving the NRC's concern and that the B&WOG would work with the NRC on this progress. On February 13, 1986, the Owners Group provided a response to the January 24, 1986 letter.
In that response the Owners Group noted that they would take the lead in a planned effort to define concerns related to the frequency of reactor trips and the complexity of the post-trip responses in B&W plants.
It was also indicated that the plan would be presented to the NRC in April, which was the subject of this meeting.
The B&WOG discussed the organization and revised planning basis, the program objectives and goals, and the program process which includes (1) information gathering; (2) integration; and (3) implementation. The specific plan details were also discussed as indicated in Enclosure 2.
The goal of the B&WOG program are'(1) by the end of 1990 the average per plant trip frequency will be less than two per, year; and (2) by the end of 1990 the number of transients as classified by steasuranle' parameters (Category "C",
defined in Enclosure 2) will be reduced'to'0 l'per plant year based on a moving three year average.
The B&WOG requested NRC input based on this meeting by May 2, 1986. The staff indicated that the NRC should be able to provide comments in about two
. weeks. The detailed Owners Group plan is scheduled to be submitted on May 16, 1986 for NRC review. Other B&W Owners Group milestones are shown in.
gMALNM Walter A. Paulson, Program Manager PWR Project Directorate #6 Division of PWR Licensing-B DISTJLIBUT4
Enclosures:
Nefitral File EJordon JStolz As stated NRC PDR BGrimes LOCAL PDR ACRS(10)
WPaulson NRC Participants Q
OELD PD#6 Reading File 0,
PD#6 j
P '6 WPau n:jj JSt z
,j, P
04/
/86 04 6
8604280319 860409 DR TOPRP EftvB
6 b
+
i MEETING SUMMAR DISTDIBUTION Licensee:
B&W Owners Group
- Copies also sent to those people on service (cc) list for subject plant (s).
Docket File NRC PDR L PDR PBD-6 Rdg JStolz PM OELD EJordan BGrimes ACRS-10 NRC Participants WPaulson LMarsh RJones DCrutchfield FMiraglia JWermiel CMiller DThatcher JCalvo NLauben WRegan RWright RWeller AToth, R:V TKing GPlumlee MRubin ASukiewicz CMcCracken TSpets FSchroeder RKendall HBailey FManning
-g n-4 ENCLOSURE 1 APRIL 8, 1986
'NRC STAFF AND B&W OWNERS GROUP MEETING ATTENDANCE LIST NAME AFFILIATION W. Paulson NRR/DPL-B L. Marsh NRR/DPL-B W. Beckner RES R. Jones NRR/DPL-B D. Crutchfield NRR/DPL-B F. Miraglia NRR/DPL-B N. Rutherford Duke Power Co.
H. Tucker Duke Power Co.
G. Braulke GPU Nuclear Corp.
E. Simpson Fla. Power Corp.
R. Granthner B&W T. Enos Arkansas Power & Light G. Campbell Arkansas Power & Light D. Basdekas RES J. Wermiel NRR/DPL-B C. Miller NRR/DPL-B G. Burdick RES E. Kane B&W S. Rose Duke Power Co.
T. Daniels Duke Power Co.
F. Hudson Duke Power Co.
J. Walters B&W R. Black B&W D. Thatcher NRR/DSR0 J. Calvo NRR/DPL-B S. Jain Toledo Edison Co.
W. Wilson B&W N. Lauben NRR/DPL-B T. Charlton EG&G Idaho W. Regan NRR/DPL-B R. Wright NRR/DPL-B R. Weller NRR/DPL-B A. Toth NRC/ Region V P. Litteneker DOE-Idaho S. Bassetts Consultant E. Schmidt NUS M. Wagner Nuclearics WK/Inside NRC R. Lee RES T. King NRR/DSR0 T. Baxter Shaw, Pittman, Potts, Trobridge G. Plumlee NRR/DPL-B W. Beach RES M. Rubin NRR/DPL-B A. Szukiewicz NRR/DSR0
., a y
APRIL 8, 1986 NRC STAFF AND B&W OWNERS GROUP MEETING ATTENDANCE LIST NAME AFFILIATION L. Shotkin RES E. Swanson B&W R. Enzinna B&W G. Schteck B&W C. Pryor B&W C. McCracken NRR/DPL-B M. Beaumont Westinghouse J. Taylor B&W T. Speis NRR/DSR0 D. Houmenonsky OCM F. Schroeder NRR/DPL-B R. Kendall NRR/DPL-B B. Agrawal RES G. Schwenk DOE P. Wood Delian Corp.
F. Faist INP0 H. Bailey NRC/IC R. Major ACRS Staff J. Conran ROGR Staff M. Jacobs Florida Power Corp.
R. Huston AIF F. Manning NRC/AE0D D. Solbeg RES D. Hinckley RES J. Langenbach GPU Nuclear L. Haack TVA J. Ritts TVA S. Rubin AE0D/ROAB
- c.. 2.=
e 26 NRC MEETING TO REVIEW B&W OWNERS GROUP TRIP REDUCTION AND TRANSIENT RESPONSE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM i
i APRIL 8,1986 l
BETHESDA, MARYLAND
- s INTRODUCTION o
FEBRUARY 5,1986 MEETING BACKGROUND
- OWNERS GROUP PROGRAMS AND RESTRUCTURING
- B&WOG RESPONSE TO 6/9/85 DB TRANSIENT
- B&WOG RESPONSE TO 12/26/85 RS TRANSIENT o
B&WOG PROGRAMS HAVE BEEN EFFECTIVE.
A SHIFT IN EMPHASIS WILL IMPROVE EFFECTIVENESS
- TRANSIENT RESPONSE
- IMPROVED ROOT CAUSE INVESTIGATION
- RECOMMENDATION FOLLOW-THROUGH B&WOG COMMITTMENTS FROM 2/5/86 MEETING.
o
- LEAD REASSESSMENT
- IMPROVE PERFORMANCE PRESENT PLAN TO NRC IN APRIL
)
TODAY'S MEETING OBJECTIVES 1.
PRESENT INFORMATION TO NRC REGARDING B&WOG TRIP REDUCTION AND TRANSIENT RESPONSE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM: STATUS OF PROGRAM PLAN AND ACTIONS IN PROGRESS.
II.
OBTAIN NRC COMMENTS AND FEEDBACK REGARDING THE EXTENT TO WHICH THEIR CONCERNS ARE ADDRESSED.
B&W OWNERS / NRC MEETING APRIL 8,1986 AGENDA
^
INTRODUCTION H.B. TUCKER PURPOSE OF MEETING E. C. SIMPSON ORGANIZATION AND REVISED PLANN1' 3 BASIS E. C. SIMPSON PROGRAM OBJECTIVES AND GOALS E. C. SIMPSON SIMPLIFIED PROCESS FLOWCHART.
E. C. SIMPSON SPECIFIC PLAN DETAILS G.R.BRAULKE
-- CONCERN IDENTIFICATION G.R.BRAULKE
-- SYSTEMS REVIEWS G.R.BRAULKE
-- PROCEDURE REVIEW J.T.ENOS
-- INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF DESIGN SENSITIVITY J.T.ENOS
-- RISK ASSESSMENT J.T.ENOS
-- INTEGRATED SCHEDULE J.T.ENOS
-- IMPLEMENTATION J.T.ENOS
SUMMARY
OF PLAN.
E. C. SIMPSON CLOSING REMARKS.
H.B. TUCKER
s ORGANIZATION AND REVISED PLANNING BASIS o
B&WOG PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: DEFINE AND IMPLEMENT ACTIONS THAT CONTRIBUTE TO THE SAFE, RELIABLE AND ECONOMICAL OPERATION OF B&W NSSS PLANTS.
o NEED TO ESTABLISH THIS OBJECTIVE AROUND FOCUSED MAJOR PROGRAMS.
o MAJOR PROGRAMS TO SATISFY B&WOG OBJECTIVE
- TRIP REDUCTION AND TRANSIENT RESPONSE IMPROVEMENT
- AVAILABILITY IMPROVEMENT
- ECONOMIC BENEFIT
- OTHER (ADDITIONAL PROGRAMS MAY BE REQUIRED) i o
ESTABLISH AN OBJECTIVE STATEMENT OR GOAL FOR EACH MAJOR PROGRAM o
DEVELOP A DETAILED PLAN FOR EACH MAJOR PROGRAM
's ORGANIZATION AND REVISED PLANNING BASIS o
ONGOING AND FUTURE B&WOG WORK WILL BE INTEGRATED
' ~
INTO EACH MAJOR PROGRAM o
DETAILED SCHEDULES ARE BEING DEVELOPED, AND WILL BE MONITORED AND REPORTED FOR EACH MAJOR PROGRAM AT EACH STEERING COMMITTEE AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING l
o ALL RECOMMENDATIONS STEMMING FROM EACH MAJOR PROGRAM WILL BE TRACKED BY THE B&WOG FOR IMPLEMENTATION BY EACH UTILITY
.l o
INPO PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR THE B&W PLANTS WILL BE 1
MONITORED AND REPORTED AT EACH EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING l
l
.r
..__.._,--.,r
.e SN O
I T
S T D N
A A N
E A
O I
R L
YI E
l ig l
l I II T
R T P
L A
U T
O O
Z S
P I
S 3s UN I
I N
M DA NC O
C I
N M
TO SN NI E T FO A
I FI S U I
AT N L TC A A SN R V U
TE F
i!
P L
S I
N CC E
T M A E l
- R#
R G I
T I
INN S
OEAl i
C A P
1 Y
O N H
SMC R A S
T N
C P M EE TR N
0 6
C C
T I
A R
21 R
1 NA Vg C
TN IM T
CTS S
A I
L N
Y O
g l
O M
BgMA IL N OCR T
S
- g M
A AvRR I
O W EE N
ILoGI T S R
& J l
G A
O ApOA U
I S O C
p A
T i
A R
H L
L PN 1
R E E E
E VeR Y
g E L L
A U
E AgPC EN C
A uM S
P V E G
T K
T TA I
T N
N g
N P
I T
R U
I I
ITM si i
S O
RIR Rl T
C M MI u
C E
E M E M EMA E
r X O TOH rO o
E C SCC SC f
Y T 5
R N O
N ru TM A
A O
M I
L R
R U
I C
C A
S E
gH R
R pC 4
S M
SE W
EC O
ER W
STO UTF g
g OI I MK C
N RM5 MA AOA I
A M VCT R R GI o O A R H yPC I
l l
l l
l
4 a
4 B&W OWNERS GROUP TRIP REDUCTION AND TRANSIENT RESPONSE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM OBJECTIVE REDUCE THE NUMBER OF TRIPS AND TRANSIENTS ON B&W OWNERS GROUP PLANTS AND ENSURE ACCEPTABLE PLANT RESPONSE DURING THOSE TRIPS AND TRANSIENTS WHICH l
DO OCCUR.
1 GOALS 1.
BY THE END OF 1990 THE AVERAGE PER PLANT TRIP i
FREQUENCY WILL BE LESS THAN TWO PER YEAR.
l 2.
BY THE END OF 1990 THE NUMBER OF TRANSIENTS AS l
CLASSIFIED BY MEASURABLE PARAMETERS (CATEGORY "C")
WILL BE REDUCED TO 0.1 PER PLANT PER YEAR BASED ON A l
MOVING THREE YEAR AVERAGE.
i l
l I
. I
..~.-
= _.
.i DESCRIPTION OF APPROACH PROGRAMMATIC ACTIONS o
BROAD SEARCH FOR PROBLEMS: NSS AND BOP
- SYSTEM DESIGN
- MAINTENANCE
- OPERATION i
o USE OF OUTSIDE CONSULTANT TO ASSESS IMPORTANCE OF SENSITIVITY i
o IMPROVED ROOT CAUSE DETERMINATION o
RECOMMENDATION FOLLOW THROUGH i
o-SCHEDULE / PROJECT INTEGRATION SPECIFIC TYRICAL ACTIONS i
o ICS/NNI REVIEW i
o MFW RELIABILITY IMPROVEMENT; SYSTEM REVIEW
[
AND COMPARISON o
SECONDARY PLANT RELIEF SYSTEMS REVIEW o
REVIEW CATEGORY "C" TRANSIENTS AS A COMPOSITE GROUP o
OPERATOR INTERVIEWS l
o PROCEDURES REVIEW 1
E
~~
~
l Stop-Trip Program Process
- l. Information Gathering II. Integration Ill. Implementation I
1 TAP DATA l
l l
g EXISTilIG l
B&WOG OTER PROJECTS l
i DATA l
l l
-c, l
^
LIST ilECl30 0 04-BUDGET IITitITY TI M M IN i
MtC OF DEFILE PRIORITIZE SCHEDULE.
pygg j
CGICEMIS IIF Q0VD O ff ->
CINICDtitS COIICERNS ANO
+
M TS 19FLD0ff-l AltEAS PERFORM TO N mG ATION I
l PROJECTS CONIITTEE i
i I
A I
S'I I#
I l
S
==V-S l
8 IlWUSTRY I
l Pit 0JECTS i
1 I
INDEPDEDIT IWIIITOR. REPORT l
lm STATUS OF REVIEW 0F 5'
IIFLDOITATICII l
SDISITIVITY l
l l
- ORr l
i t
sontS l'
ACHIEVDeli l
I l
l l
i
l h
PROGRAM PROJECTS STATUS
.(4/1/86)
COMPLETED ARTS SETPOINT CHANGE HP TRIP SETPOINT CHANGE TURBINE TRIP REDUCTION STUDY MFW PUMP TRIP STUDY i
QUICKSORT OF TAP DATA NEAR COMPLETION ICS INPUTS FAILURE STUDY ICS DESIGN FEATURES REVIEW l
t
I PROGRAM PROJECTS STATUS (4/1/86)
WORKING INDEP_ENDENT REVIEW OF B&W DESIGN SENSITIVITY REFINED SORT OF TAP DATA ROOT CAUSE PROCESS i
MFW SYSTEM PROBLEMS STUDY
)
ICS/NNI CONFIGURATION IDENTIFICATION ICS/NNI PRO.CEDURES REVIEW RPS TEST INTERVAL EXTENSION EFW RELIABILITY ANALYSIS COMPARISON RECOMMENDATIONS TO REDUCE TRIPS FOLLOWING REFUELING OUTAGE REVISE / FOCUS PREVIOUS RECOMMENDATIONS i
IN-PLANNING INTERVIEWS OF OPS /MAINT. PERSONNEL MSSV PROBLEMS ICS/NNI EVALUATION MFW PROBLEMS STUDY FOLLOW-ON ITEMS AFW COMPARISON REVIEW IDENTIFY OTHER DATA / DEVELOP REVIEW PLAN FOLLOW-ON REVIEW OF OTHER DATA TAP PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS
,e,--,.,
m.... - - -.. _,_. - - -...-.. - - - - - _
-,.-.m..
_m.__.
.,,, ~,,, - - -. - - - -.
SPECIFIC PLAN DETAILS c
TAP DATA REVIEW ROOT CAUSE PROCESS OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE INTERVIEWS OTHER DATA IDENTIFICATION AND REVIEW j
SYSTEMS REVIEW i
I i
i e
l
?
l
REVIEW OF TRANSIENT ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (TAP) DATA REVIEW AND SORT THE TAP DATA TO BETTER FOCUS ON AREAS WHERE IMPROVEMENT IS NEEDED I
DEFINE SPECIFIC MEASUREABLE PARAMETERS TO l
" GRADE" THE COMPLEXITY OF TRANSIENTS i
USE THE " GRADED" TRANSIENT TAP REPORTS TO IDENTIFY SPECIFIC CONCERNS FOR ACTION 4
5 I
i
l l
l TRANSIENT CATEGORIZATION THE INTENT OF THE TRANSIENT CATEGORIZATION IS TO SERVE AS AN EVALUATION AND PERFORMANCE MONITORING AID.
BY ASSIGNING SPECIFIC MEASURABLE THRESHOLDS FOR A GROUP OF IMPORTANT PLANT PARAMETERS, WE CAN CONVENIENTLY COMPARE PERFORMANCE AMONG THE PLANTS AND TREND PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT WITH TIME.
i THE TRANSIENT CATEGEORIES WERE SELECTED USING ENGINEERING JUDGMENT. IT IS NOT INTENDED THAT THESE CATEGORIES BE USED AS A BASIS FOR JUDGING SAFETY. THEY ARE AN EVALUATION TOOL.
l l
l 1
--_n-.--,,-..-
TRANSIENT CATEGORIES 4
I.
NORMAL RESPONSE CLASSIFICATION CATEGORY "A" j
)
PLANT RESPONSE PARAMETERS REMAIN WITHIN PREFERRED, OR EXPECTED RANGE.
CATEGORY "B" PLANT RESPONSE SLIGHTLY EXCEEDS THE EXPECTED RANGE j
IN ONE OR MORE PARAMETERS, BUT DOES NOT REACH THE CATEGORY "C" LIMITS AND IS NOT A SIGNIFICANT l
CONCERN.
THIS CATEGORY IS USED TO BETTER FOCUS EFFORTS ON TRIP REDUCTION AND TRANSIENT RESPONSE IMPROVEMENT AS THESE MAY BE PRECURSORS TO CATEGORY i
"C" EVENTS.
t i
II. ABNORMAL RESPONSE CLASSIFICATION CATEGORY "C" SYSTEM CONDITIONS REACH LIMITS WHICH REQUIRE SAFETY SYSTEM AND EXTENSIVE OPERATOR RESPONSE TO MITIGATE THE TRANSIENT.
t l
I r
j s
l
4 TRANSIENT CATEGORIZATION PARAMETERS
- 1. REACTIVITY
- 2. RCS PRESSURE
- 3. RCS TEMERATURE l
- 4. RCS INVENTORY
- 5. OTSG PRESSURE
\\
- 6. OTSG LEVEL 1
l I
i
B&W PLANT TRANSIENTS (1980 - 1985) i NUMBER OF CATEGORY EVENTS NORMAL RESPONSE 202 j
A 75
)
B 127 ABNORMAL RESPONSE 1Q c
to i
212 I
I i
l i
l CATEGORY "C" EVENTS B&W PLANTS (1980 - 1985) i
\\
i i
STABILITY PARAMETER EXCEEDED l
REAC-RCS RCS RCS OTSG OTSG UNIT DATE TlVITY PRES. TEMP. INVEN. PRES. INVEN.
I
- 1. CR-3 2/26/80 X
X X
X X
- 2. ANO-14/7/80 X
X
)
- 3. CR-3 6/16/81 X
X X
X r
- 4. RS 6/17/81 X
J
- 5. D-B 3/2/84 X
- 6. RS 3/19/84 X
X X
f
- 7. D-B 6/9/85 X
X X
i
- 8. RS 10/2/85 X
X
- 9. CR-3 10/9/85 X
j 10.RS 12/26/85 X
X X
X l
l I
i i
4
,,.a._
,,__.n,_~,.___,--__,_,_,,__,,n._..----,,,-_.,,.a
j l
i ROOT CAUSE PROCESS l
l
- REVIEW EACH PLANT'S ROOT CAUSE PROCESS AND PROCEDURE AS IT EXISTS NOW i
- DEVELOP A LIST OF SPECIFIC ELEMENTS THAT SHOULD l
BE IN THE ROOT CAUSE PROCESS l
- PROVIDE A GENERIC ROOT CAUSE PROCESS FOR i
IMPLEMENTATION AT EACH PLANT l
l
- IMPLEMENT THE MODIFIED ROOT CAUSE PROCESS AT EACH PLANT l
- UTILIZE THE ROOT CAUSE PROCESS IN FUTURE EVENTS TO:
- ENSURE THOROUGH INVESTIGATIONS i
- DETERMINE ROOT AND CONTRIBUTING CAUSES
- IDENTIFY EFFECTIVE CORRECTIVE ACTION i
4 4
i
f INTERVIEWS WITH OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL l
USE INPO DEVELOPED FOCUSED INTERVIEW PROCESS i
i FOCUSED INTERVIEWS WITH EACH PLANT SITE OPERATIONS AND i
MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL i
i f
LOOK FOR TRANSIENTS WHICH MAY NOT HAVE RESULTED IN REACTOR TRIPS BUT WERE SIGNIFICANT i
LOOK FOR AREAS WHERE IMPROVEMENTS COULD REDUCE THE NEED FOR POST-TRIP OPERATOR ACTIONS 1
i TRACK DOWN AND DEFINE CONCERNS IN PROCEDURES,
)
MAINTENANCE, AND HUMAN FACTORS AREAS l
l l
l I
l 9,.
OTHER DATA IDENTIFICATION AND REVIEW
- IDENTIFY OPERATIONAL HISTORY AND ANALYTICAL RESULTS FROM DOCUMENTS SUCH AS:
- LERs
- I&E BULLETINS AND INFORMATION NOTICES
- UTILITY INTERNAL EVENT REPORTS 1
- NPRDS i
- PRAs
- FMEAs
- PRE-TAP OPERATIONAL DATA i
- OTHER OPERATIONAL HISTORY
- DEVELOP A PLAN FOR REVIEW OF THIS INFORMATION
- CONDUCT THDSE REVIEWS
- lDENTIFY ADDITIONAL AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT i
i i
1 l
- - _ -_ _..___ -,__,__,- __...,,.- ___ _._,._.-.,, --__..--~ ~
- _... _ -,. ~... _, _ - - _ _,,
i l
l SYSTEM AND COMPONENTS REVIEWS A PERFORMANCE AND RELIABILITY REVIEW OF SYSTEMS /
l COMPONENTS WILL BE UNDERTAKEN TO IDENTIFY PERFORMANCE CRITERIA, IMPROVEMENT AREAS, AND MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW IMPROVEMENT CAN BE IMPLEMENTED.
d l
lDENTIFIED SYSTEMS TO DATE:
i SECONDARY PLANT RELIEF SYSTEMS l
ICS/NNI SYSTEM MAIN FEEDWATER SYSTEM
{
AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM i
THE RESULTS OF THE SYSTEM REVIEWS WILL BECOME INPUT I
INTO THE OVERALL PROCESS OF IDENTIFYING, PRIORITIZING, SCHEDULING, AND IMPLEMENTING IMPROVEMENTS 1
l i
i I
i 1
1
SECONDARY PLANT RELIEF SYSTEM REVIEW PROJECT GENERAL APPROACH 1
l INFORMATION GATHERING INFORMATION EVALUATION ACTION DEFINITION j
I 1
l l
MAIN STEAM SAFETY VALVE PROJECT t
i a
O TAP DATA SHOWS POST-TRIP MSSV PROBLEMS HAVE OCCURRED AT ALL PLANTS i
O THREE BASIC ACTIONS WILL BE TAKEN:
i REDUCE NUMBER OF TRANSIENTS WHICH LIFT MSSVs REDUCE NUMBER OF MSSVs THAT LIFT DURING TRANSIENTS IMPROVE MSSV PERFORMANCE WHEN THEY LIFT J
l 1
l L- -.-.
REDUCING NUMBER OF MSSV THAT LIFT DURING TRANSIENTS ACTIONS BEING CONSIDERED
- 2. SECONDARY SYSTEM DESIGN PRESSURE REVIEW i
l
- 4. OPERATING WITH LOWER SECONDARY PRESSURE j
(
I i
i k
l
,.n-,,,..a,,
,_-a
,,_,w,
..,-,.-,,...,-,n..-
i IMPROVING MSSV PERFORMANCE INFORMATION EVALUATION o
EVALUATE OPERATING EXPERIENCE o
EVALUATE MAINTENANCE PRACTICES i
o COMPARE VALVE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS 1
l o
COMPARE SETTING TECHNIQUES DEVELOP PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS l
o MAINTENANCE l
o TESTING o
HARDWARE CONFIGURATION 2
I L
i i
.-e
--.wm,.-.---..---.--y v--- - - -
- yw- -.
_.. - - - +
-,w-c.-w.,----,_-w-_--.~ew,----,
c--
e ICS/NNI EVALUATION COMPREHENSIVE EFFORT TO DEVELOP RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS TO LIMIT CONSEQUENCES OF FAILURES l
AND THEREBY REDUCE THE ICS/NNI CONTRIBUTION TO TRIP FREQUENCY AND TRANSlENT SEVERITY i
APPROACH:
l
- REVIEW ORIGINAL FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS l
l
- REVIEW PREVIOUS PRAs, FMEAs, STANDARDS, NUREGs, l
IE BULLETINS, OWNERS GROUP ACTIVITIES: PRODUCE i
LIST OF COMBINED RECOMMENDATIONS I
- REVIEW CURRENT PLANT OPERATING PHILOSOPHIES ON l
lNTERFACING SYSTEMS AS THEY RELATE TO ICS/NNI l
DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS
- EMPLOY RESULTS OF INDEPENDENT DESIGN SENSITIVITY j
REPORT, FOCUSED OPERATIONS / MAINTENANCE INTERVIEWS, AND TAP DATA BASE REVIEW TO SUPPORT THIS EVALUATION l
- IDENTIFY SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN FUNCTIONAL REQUIREMENTS
- DEFINE CONFIGURATION OF ICS/NNI SYSTEMS AS THEY EXIST TODAY AT EACH PLANT i
l
- COMPARE EXISTING ICS/NNI WITH RESULTS OF ABOVE EVALUATIONS
- EVALUATE THE COMPARISON. DEVELOP A LIST OF:
l
- CONCERNS
- RECOMMENDATIONS IDENTIFIED BUT NOT ADEQUATELY l
lMPLEMENTED
- DEVELOP RECOMMENDED CHANGES (HARDWARE, PROCEDURES, l
TRAINING, MAINTENANCE) OR IDENTIFY PATHS TO DETERMINE j
WHAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS SHOULD BE i
l i
i l
l
V.lEW 1
i.
DETAILED SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF OPERATING EXPERIENCE FOR 1984-85 FEEDWATER TRANSIENTS FOR ADEQUACY OF CORRECTIVE ACTIONS i
SEQUENTIAL SITE VISITS FOR GATHERING AND SHARING j
INFORMATION.
INTERVIEWS WITH MAINTENANCE, 1
)
MAINTENANCE ENGINEERING, OPERATORS, AND ENGINEERING STAFF AT EACH B&WOG PLANT
]
IDENTIFY GENERIC OR PLANT SPECIFIC PROBLEMS AND MODIFICATIONS OR IMPROVEMENTS WHICH ARE APPROPRIATE I
REASSESS THE SCOPE AND PRIORITY OF EXISTING B&WOG AND UTILITY PROJECTS INITIATE PROJECTS TO ADDRESS IDENTIFIED CONCERNS STATUS: ALL BUT ONE SITE VISIT COMPLETE l
1 I
l i
i l
I AUXILIARY FEEDWATER SYSTEM REVIEW REVIEW AND COMPARE EXISTING AFW SYSTEMS DESIGN, l
I DESIGN BASES AND PLANNED CHANGES AT B&WOG PLANTS.
I i
I COMPARE EXISTING AFW SYSTEM RELIABILITY ANALYSES AND i
i DETERMINE NEED FOR UPDATES BASED ON SYSTEM CHANGES.
I I
I,
)
REVIEW CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH THE AFW SYSTEM WAS TESTED TO CONFIRM THAT THE SYSTEM WILL FUNCTION UNDER ANTICIPATED NORMAL AND ACCIDENT CONDITIONS.
IDENTIFY ANY PROBLEMS OR CORRECTIVE ACTIONS NEEDED.
l l
j l
l I
i i
o
1 PROCEDURES REVIEW 1
1 l
CONDUCT A REVIEW OF PLANT PROCEDURAL HIERARCHY AND VERIFY COMPLETENESS OF 4
PROCEDURE PACKAGE.
i l
1 ESTABLISH A FORMALIZED PROCESS FOR l
FEEDBACK TO THE PROCEDURES TECHNICAL i
BASES DOCUMENT.
\\
i i
l l
1 1
.~.
INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF DESIGN SENSITIVITY I
COMPARISON OF TYPICAL CURRENTLY OPERATING B&W UNIT l
AGAINST FOUR REPRESENTATIVE CE AND W REACTORS IN THE l
AREAS OF:
i L
THERMODYNAMIC RESPONSE OF THE REACTOR AND STEAM SYSTEM DURING NORMAL PLANT OPERATION j
{
o EXTENSIVE COMPARISON OF DESIGN AND OPERATIONAL i
l CHARACTERISTICS l
o QUANTIFY DIFFERENCES IN THE INHERENT CONTROL OF J
KEY PLANT VARIABLES j
2.
PLANT THERMODYNAMIC RESPONSE COMPARISONS DURING ANTICIPATED OPERATING OCCURRENCES.
1 i
o DEVELOP DEMONSTRABLY VALID AND QUANTITATIVE INDICES OF DIFFERENCES AMONG PLANTS TO
' MALFUNCTIONS l
3.
PLANT THERMODYNAMIC RESPONSE COMPARISONS FOR DESIGN BASIS ACCIDENTS l
4.
PLANT COMPARISONS OF PROTECTION SYSTEMS i
l o
DESIGN DIFFERENCES AFFECTING COMPLEXITY ANO REllABLITY OF HARDWARE, (E.G. NUMBER OF PROTECTIVE FUNCTIONS, CONTROL SCHEME AND SYSTEM LOGIC CONFIGURATION, INSTRUMENTATION, r
POWER SUPPLY ARRANGEMENT, ETC.).
l o
OPERATING EXPERIENCE ASSESSMENT OF ACTUATIONS AND f
j OFF-NORMAL OCCURRENCES.
l o
PERFORMANCE RELIABILITY EVALUATION OF MAJOR l
l 1
COMPONENTS.
i
{
l
INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF DESIGN SENSITIVITY (CONTINUED) ll~
5.
PLANT COMPARISON OF CONTROL SYSTEMS i
o DESIGN COMPARISON OF POWER GENERATION CONTROL I
o COMPLEXITY AND RELIABILITY OF HARDWARE o
OPERATING EXPERIENCE ASSESSMENT OF THE VARIOUS j
SYSTEMS 1
i o
PERFORMANCE RELIABILITY EVALUATION OF MAJOR COMPONENTS 6.
OPERATOR RESPONSIBILITY COMPARISON DURING NORMAL AND OFF-NOttMAL OPERATIONS i
i I
o REQUIREMENTS FOR MANUAL ACTIONS l
1 l
o ASSESSMENT OF THE DIFFICULTY IN CONTROLLING PLANT VARIABLES OR SYSTEMS INCLUDING TIME REPONSE REQUIREMENTS.
i 4
l RISK ASSESSMENT l
USE CATEGORY "C" EVENTS TO
- DETERMlNE HOW EACH EVENT IS REFLECTED IN EXISTING PRAs.
j i
l l
- ASSESS THE RISK IMPORTANCE OF THESE EVENTS.
- DEVELOP GENERALIZED CONCLUSIONS FOR ALL B&W PLANTS COMPARE PRA INITIATING EVENT FREQUENCIES WITH TAP i
DATA.
i l
ONCE NRC "SASA" IS PUBLISHED, A COMPARISON WITH l
EXISTING PRA SUCCESS CRITERIA WILL BE MADE.
l IDENTIFY, COMPARE, AND EVALUATE DOMINANT ACCIDENT SEQUENCES, KEY INITIATING EVENTS, KEY MITIGATING SYSTEMS, AND IMPORTANT OPERATOR ACTIONS FROM l
EXISTING PRAs.
j
- EVALUATE THE IMPORTANCE OF ANY DIFFERENCES l
lDENTIFIED.. THE EVALUATION WILL CONSIDER MAINTENANCE, EQUIPMENT, PROCEDURES, AND l
TRAINING.
j
- RANK SYSTEMS BY CONTRIBUTION TO RISK TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCES. IDENTIFY ROLE OF NSS SYSTEMS VS. BOP SUPPORT SYSTEMS.
USE PRA TO SUPPLEMENT PRIORITIZATION PROCESS.
i
.-,---r-,..
,,,,,.y
,_n.-.
-.,n.,,_...-,.-
,,,,,,.,e-svn-,.,~,-
_ _ e
INIEGBAT_ED_S.CilED.LlLE
- lDENTIFY ALL PROJECTS UNDERWAY OR PLANNED RELATED TO TRIP FREQUENCY REDUCTION ON PLANT TRANSIENT RESPONSE 1
IMPROVEMENT ON B&WOG PLANTS.
- B&WOG SPONSORED
- INDIVIDUAL UTILITY SPONSORED l
- INDUSTRY SPONSORED
- COMPARE THE ONGOING OR PLANNED PROJECTS WITH THE l
PRIORITIZED CONCERNS IDENTIFIED.
i l
- FOR THOSE CONCERNS WHERE A PROJECT IS NOT PLANNED l
THAT WOULD RESOLVE THE CONCERN, IDENTIFY WHAT l
SHOULD BE DONE AND BY WHAT ORGANIZATION. IF ORGANIZATION IS EXTERNAL TO B&WOG, SOLICIT i
SUPPORT AND SPONSORSHIP OF THE PROGRAM.
- MAINTAIN SCHEDULE FOR ALL PROJECTS IDENTIFIED j
- B&WOG PROJECTS - BUDGET AND MANAGE TO i
COMPLETION I
- OTHER PROJECTS - MONITOR SCHEDULE AND l
USE RESULTS WHEN AVAILABLE I
)
i 1
4 g
I l
l
4 i
I B&WOG RECOMMENDATION TRACKING SYSTEM
- AS PROJECTS ARE COMPLETED RESULTS WILL INCLUDE l
SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF i
IMPROVEMENTS.
l
- THESE RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BE TRACKED FOR IMPLEMENTATION AT APPLICABLE PLANTS.
j
- STATUS OF RECOMMENDATION IMPLEMENTATION WILL BE REPORTED TO THE STEERING AND EXECUTIVE i
COMMITTEES PERIODICALLY TO ENSURE EACH UTILITY i
IS EFFECTIVELY ADDRESSING THE RECOMMENDATION.
l (UTILITIES WILL BE MONITORING EACH OTHER) f
MONITORING PLANT PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT
~
S*
THE GOALS OF THE B&WOG TRIP FREQUENCY REDUCTION AND TRANSIENT RESPONSE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM l
HAVE BEEN SET.
4 PROGRESS TOWARD ACHIEVING THESE GOALS WILL BE MEASURED PERIODICALLY AND REPORTED TO THE STEERING AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEES AND NRC.
i l
i
~!,
B&WOG PERFORMANCE AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS OPERATIONS AND MULTISYSTEM MAINTENANCE REWEW gNTERVIEWS 4
i SENSITIVITY BROAD REASSESSMENT STUDY BY C'
'C PROCEDIJRE INDEPENDENT i
CONSULTANT -
REVIEW (WHOLE PLANT)
\\
l i
RE REVIEW OF PAST SIX YEARS NRC STAFF INPUT 2
OPERATING i
EXPERIENCE (WHOLE PLANT)
(WHOLE PLANT) i I
l I
4 MAJOR PROGRAM MILESTONES DRAFT PLAN APPROVAL BY EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MARCH 14 INITIATE INDEPENDENT SENSITIVITY STUDY MARCH 21 SET QUANTITATIVE PROGRAM GOALS MARCH 27 PRESENT DRAFT PLAN TO NRC MANAGEMENT APRIL 8 START OPERATOR INTERVIEWS APRIL 16 IDENTIFY OTHER INFORMATION AVAILABLE APRIL NRC INPUT BASED ON APRIL 8 MEETING AND MAY 2 RESIDENT INSPECTOR INTERVIEWS PROGRAM PLAN APPROVAL AND BUDGETING MAY 7 BY STEERING AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE SUBMIT PROGRAM PLAN TO NRC FOR REVIEW MAY 16 MEET WITH NRC ON PLAN LATE-MAY OBTAIN NRC CONCURRENCE ON PROGRAM PLAN JUNE 2 PRELIMINARY INDEPENDENT SENSITIVITY STUDY JUNE MEET WITH NRC ON PRELIMINARY SENSITIVITY JUNE STUDY RESULTS REVIEW PROGRESS AND PROVIDE REPORT TO NRC JULY REVIEW PROGRESS AND REPORT TO NRC OCTOBER U
u..
i CLOSING REMARKS i
o B&WOG PERFORMANCE AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENT GOALS HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED.
o A BROAD REASSESSMENT OF TRANSIENT PERFORMANCE IS l
UNDERWAY TO IDENTIFY PERFORMANCE AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS o THE DRAFT PROGRAM PLAN IS COMPLETE: FINAL TO BE SUBMITTED TO NRC o
INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS ARE PROGRESSING I
o NRC INPUT IS ENCOURAGED ON PLAN CONTENT i
t c
o A MANAGEMENT PROCESS IS BEING DEFINED TO MONITOR AND ASSURE ACTION IMPLEMENTATION BY EACH UTILITY l
o BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF CAUSES OF OFF NORMAL t
POST-TRIP BEHAVIOR IS BEING DEVELOPED i
o B&WOG ACTIVITIES RELATED TO DAVIS BESSE AND RANCHO SECO TRANSIENTS ARE CONTINUING AND ARE j
l BEING INTEGRATED INTO OVERALL PROGRAM l
TRANSIENT PERFORMANCE l
o THE NRC CAN READlLY MONITOR PROGRAM PROGRESS AND THE i
REDUCTION IN THE FREQUENCY OF COMPLEX TRANSIENTS.
i i
k f
-